Thursday, August 16, 2012

SF Council Votes for New Postal Bank Idea

Resolution to Investigate the Establishment of a new

Postal Banking System

http://sflaborcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/08-06-12Res2InvestigateEstbOfPostalBankingSystem.pdf

Whereas, expanding postal services and developing new sources of revenue are important
components of any effort to save the public Post Office and preserve living-wage jobs; and

Whereas, many countries, including Germany, France, Italy and Japan, have a long and
successful history of postal banking, where customers do their basic banking at their
neighborhood post office; and

Whereas, in the U.S. a Postal Savings system operated successfully from 1911 to 1967,
providing a safe and efficient place for customers to save and transfer funds – until it was
killed under pressure from the banking industry. Postal Savings was set up to attract the
savings of immigrants accustomed to saving at post offices in their native countries, provide
safe depositories for people who had lost confidence in private banks, and make it more convenient for working people than private banks (since post offices were open substantially longer than bankers’ hours); and

Whereas, postal banks, called Kiwibanks, are now thriving in New Zealand, with bank branches called PostShops in local post offices – “putting us in more locations than any other bank in New Zealand literally overnight (without wasting millions on new premises!)” [Kiwibank website] In an early “move your money” campaign, New Zealanders voted with their feet. In an island nation of only 4 million, Kiwibank attracted 500,000 customers away from the Australian big banks in just four years; and

Whereas, the giant banks that dominate the U.S. financial and political system are corrupt institutions that defrauded homeowners in the mortgage scandal, and engaged in  complex multi-Billion dollar hijinks that brought on the 2007-09 financial crisis. The American working people have lost faith in these banks as a trustworthy place to put their hard-earned money; and

Whereas, a USPS bank would offer a “public option” for banking, providing basic checking and savings – and no complex financial wheeling and dealing. Postal banks could serve the 9 million people who don’t have a bank account and 21 million who use usurious check cashers, giving low-income people access to a safe banking system; and

Whereas, the Post Office is uniquely positioned, with a lot of branches around the country and an already successful business in money orders. It is a trusted and venerable institution older than the Constitution, at a time when people do not have much trust in banks. It is funded not with taxes but with postage stamps, which buy the labor and machines to transport your letter 3000 miles. It is the only U.S. agency that serves all its customers six days a week. And it is perhaps the last form of communication that protects privacy, since tampering with the mail is against federal law; and

Whereas, the Post Office should be saved and it can be saved. A Postal Bank, combining teller services with postal services, could help achieve this, while at the same time offering a competitive alternative to a runaway Wall Street banking monopoly that Congress seems unable to control; and

Whereas, the 2012 National Convention of the National Association of Letter Carriers unanimously adopted an almost identical resolution, calling for the postal unions to investigate the establishment of a Postal Banking System in the U.S.

Therefore be it resolved, that the San Francisco Labor Council urges Congress and the Executive Branch to investigate the possibility of the establishment of a public Postal Banking System in the U.S. – drawing on the rich experience of successful postal banking in Germany, France, Italy, Japan and New Zealand – and using our unprecedented network of post offices to provide safe basic checking and savings to our hundreds of millions of postal customers; and

Be it finally resolved, that we forward this resolution to affiliate unions, area labor councils,
Calif. Labor Federation, AFL-CIO and Change to Win Federation, for concurrence and action. 

Submitted by Lili Beaumont, NALC 214, and adopted by the Executive Committee of the San
Francisco Labor Council on August 6, 2012.

Respectfully,
Tim Paulson
Executive Director      

OPEIU3 AFL

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Farm Workers Need Help

ACE TOMATO WORKERS NEAR CONTRACT

After two decades, Ace Tomato workers are so close to getting their contract.

Tell the ALRB to implement the contract now by joining the virtual picket line.

Workers at Ace Tomato are tired of waiting. They are tired of dirty bathrooms, the lack of fresh water and decades of low pay. You might ask, why don't they vote for a union? They did--back in 1989! But, more than two decades later they still are waiting for their contract. And the Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB), California's legal agency charged with protecting the workers, did nothing but shuffle paperwork.

The UFW fought for and passed a law in California requiring employers to negotiate in good faith or face mandatory mediation. The way this works is a mediator speaks to both sides and neutrally sifts through both sides' documents and recommendations and at the end submits a report of terms to the ALRB which is essentially a contract. Both sides have the right to review this report and object. Then the ALRB either agrees with the objections to the report or rejects them. If they reject the objections, the report becomes a contract that both sides must legally abide by.

After several months of discussion, the mediator submitted his report to the ALRB on June 28. As expected, the company objected, but on July 25 the ALRB ruled against the company and ordered Ace Tomato to implement the final mediator's report as the contract.

It appears the company instead decided to follow their normal delaying tactics that have worked so well. They ignored the Board order!

When we heard the wage increases and other improvements were not happening, we asked the ALRB to go to court to force the company to follow the law and implement the contract the workers have been waiting more than 20 years for.

The ALRB could have and should have immediately gone to court when the company thumbed their nose at the law. Instead they sent the company a letter saying they would give them until 5 pm today, Tuesday, August 7th, to respond to the UFW’s request.

The workers are furious that the ALRB is again opening the door to the company's delaying tactics. Workers know from experience that given an inch, this company can keep up the delaying tactics for years.

Ace Tomato workers will travel to Sacramento tomorrow and hold a picket line in front of the ALRB's office demanding that the ALRB get a court order to tell the company to immediately comply with the law. Won't you join Ace Tomato workers and picket virtually by taking action and e-mailing the ALRB today?

http://action.ufw.org/ace
After you take action please share this campaign with your friends and family. You can send them an e-mail, post this campaign on your Facebook and/or Twitter page by clicking here or going to http://action.ufw.org/page/share/ace



Check out our website at: www.ufw.org and keep up with the latest news.
Check out the UFW's Social Networking pages. Click to visit our Facebook Fan Page, Facebook Cause, YouTube, Flickr, MySpace,and Care2 pages. Please link to us and become our "Friend" and follow us on Twitter too!
If you want to receive our alerts at a different e-mail address, send an e-mail to ufwofamer@aol.com
Please add us to your safelist: Please add ufwofamer@aol.com to your address book so that our messages don’t get trapped in your spam filter. If you have questions about how to do this, drop us an e-mail.

This email was sent to ruthhstraussmd@earthlink.net.
United Farm Workers,  P.O. Box 62, Keene, CA 93531, http://www.ufw.org

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Phone and Mail Unions Unite in Action

CWA Stands Up to Verizon on August 11

Rally in Philadelphia.

Tens of thousands of workers will unite next week in Philadelphia -- the birthplace of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights -- to demand economic freedom and opportunity for all.
CWA and IBEW workers will be kicking off the activities with a rally at Verizon’s office. Meet promptly at 9:45 a.m. at 900 Race Street.

We will then march to Eakins Oval, in front of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, where we will join more than 30,000 people from all over the country to stand up for the middle class and urge all Americans -- especially elected officials -- to stand with us.

It's time for everyone to stand up and be counted.

Photo of CWA President Larry Cohen:

CWA Supports a Public Postal Service

CWA stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the National Association of Letter Carriers in its battle to save the US Postal Service, CWA President Larry Cohen said last week at the biennial NALC convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Photo of CWA President Larry Cohen addressing the biennial NALC convention in Minneapolis.

“We will fight back, and we will be there together with you in that fight to save a public Postal Service as if it’s our own fight—because it is our own fight,” he said, according to the convention newspaper.

Addressing more than 8,000 Union members, Cohen said CWA’s fight against corporate greed at Verizon is not unlike letter carriers’ struggle against the Postal Service. “We get management, whether the Postal Service or Verizon, that wants to shrink us, to keep us in a box, until they can shut us down and throw us out,” he said.
He encouraged delegates to continue advocating for workers’ rights.

“When you cut our pay, we say no. When you cut our health care, we say no. When you destroy our retirement, we say no,” he said. “We stand up, we fight back.”
Over 1,000 Letter Carriers Protest Verizon Greedy in Show of Unity

Photo of Letter carriers (mail men and women) protest VeriGreedy in Minneapolis.

More than 1,000 members of the National Association of Letter Carriers last Thursday demonstrated outside a Verizon Wireless store in downtown Minneapolis in support of CWA’s yearlong fight for a fair contract. (Solidarity-ed)

CWA President Larry Cohen had addressed the delegates to the biennial convention earlier in the day, pledging CWA’s support in the battle to save the Postal Service. And in return, letter carriers poured in the street to rally against Verizon’s corporate greed.

“His remarks got the troops fired up,” said Pam Donato, who leads the NALC’s coalition-building and community services work. “We thought that maybe 200 people would show up, but when it came time to rally, I think we topped 1,000. It was massive.”

She added, “It was like breaking bread with family. It’s really a special occasion to rally with another group of workers, to support each other physically, putting to life what you do a lot of times with paper, pen and keyboard.”

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Labor and Student Activists Unite

AFL-CIO PRESIDENT TRUMKA SPEECH to STUDENT ACTIVISTS

Most of you probably don’t know much about unions. I hope you know that unions are nothing but working women and men who’ve come together for the strength to improve our lives – at work and in our economy. Some of you probably think we’re a bunch of stodgy, old-school people with outdated ideas – too interested in what’s good for us and too disinterested in what’s good for others in our communities -- and to be perfectly frank with you, there’s a grain of truth to that – and it’s something we’re working to change. But at the end of the day, our goal is and has always been simple and pure—we want to make life better for working people.


We’re not always spiffy and clean. Some of us are a little rough around the edges. But the labor movement and progressive student activists share the same core values.

And let me say this -- As the next generation of activists and leaders, you are also part of the next generation of workers, and the way you exercise your activism and solidarity on the job will define the future of work.

You see, activism isn’t limited to what we do off-hours or as career advocates. It’s also what we do every day where we work. As progressive activists we have to understand that “workers’ rights” are civil rights, to turn lousy jobs into good jobs -- even if we have to fight for it—and for that matter, to work together with employers who want to do the right things for working families and solve problems to create a sustainable future.

Your generation’s struggle for jobs—for quality jobs—with fair wages and good benefits, so that those of you who have student debt can have the ability to pay it down and have the opportunity to live the life you want: the ability to get married, to raise a family if you want to, to start a business, to fight for the causes you believe in, and to leave a stronger America for the generations that follow you -- that struggle is the struggle of the labor movement, and that struggle is also my struggle.

You see, activists from my generation and before me also needed solidarity on and off the job to improve this country. The struggles of working people haven’t changed all that much, and that’s why we share so many values in common.

Unions have been fighting for social and economic justice since our beginnings.

We’ve worked for decades, and will continue to fight, to make sure no employer can
pay you less just because you are a woman, or person of color.

We’ve supported benefits for same-sex couples since the early 1990s.

We fight today for the passage of the DREAM Act and comprehensive immigration reform.

We stood with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and the activists of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. We supported Occupy Wall St. We’re working to address the issue of college debt, and we’ll stand with the activists and the movements of tomorrow.
And, my friends, we will stand with you through it all.

Today, America is in crisis. We’re at a tipping point. Wall Street and corporate CEOs have pretty well figured out how to make mountainous profits off the backs of America’s workers, especially young workers. Big money has locked Washington in stalemate. Things can’t continue in this vein for very long.

But I might surprise you by saying that this isn’t all bad news. The good news is that we’re going to change it – I’ve never seen more determination to change it. America is in the process of rediscovering collective power to make things better for all of us, politically, socially, and economically.

My story in how I got involved within this movement is probably similar to yours. I can remember when I blew out my knee in college and lost my football scholarship. Unable to afford to go to college, I went home and got a job in a coal mine. I had to figure out how to finish my degree while working full time in some of the most dangerous work conditions imaginable. About that time I got involved in a movement in my union called Miners for Democracy.

Miners for Democracy wanted to return our union to its activist roots so it would answer not to our employers, but to our members—so we could use our union to improve ourselves. People said it couldn’t be done, but we didn’t know any better. I thought hard about what to do next, and I talked to a lot of people. I’m lucky that my father always had a head and the heart for doing the right thing. I’m lucky my mother gave me my passion and my fire.

It took years. I ended up getting my law degree, with the support of my union. It took the Miners for Democracy years of activism, risk and perseverance, but we came out on top, and that’s the shortest possible version of how I became the youngest president in the history of the United Mine Workers of America.

It would be a gross understatement to say that not everybody was supportive along the way. I think a lot of people thought I was out of my mind, or just a dreamer.

But it didn’t stop me. It still doesn’t. I’m lucky that I’ve been able to spend my entire professional life in the service of working people, of union members. And we’re still working to make sure that our labor movement struggles to help working people every way we can—first, last and always.

We try to keep our eye on a simple vision. I believe that every single working person in America who works hard and plays by the rules should have a fair shot at a decent life—the opportunity to be who they want to be and earn good pay and benefits and a secure retirement. And I believe that this ideal is not a cost to be weighed against national prosperity, but that the two are one and the same.

Here’s the most amazing thing. Our goals are much closer than most people realize. Wall Street hasn’t learned its lesson -- of course not. And sometimes it seems like some people just wish we could return to the upside of a bubble economy.

But something is happening in America.

Just a few short years ago, the DREAM Act was nowhere. Now, because the DREAMers refused to take no for an answer, it has momentum and national support from the President of the United States.

Not even a decade ago, marriage equality was considered far-fetched. It was used as a tool of the right wing. Now it, too, has the endorsement of the President of the United States, and a majority of Americans.

Collective bargaining? It dropped out of the public consciousness years and years ago -- but today, support for the rights of workers is back.

In the experience of a young person, some of these struggles may seem long, but I can look back and see that they weren’t long at all, not when measured against the history of the struggle for justice. Not when measured against the sea change they represent.

There is no end to what Campus Progress can do. You don’t sit around talking about problems. You generate ideas, and you get things done.
Look at how lucky we are! I wouldn’t want to be a leader of the American labor movement at any other time. And you? You are strong activists with your entire careers in front of you.

This is the moment that counts. You couldn’t script a better time. It is time for us to act. And I know that you will.

I want to thank each and every one of you, and I wish for all of you a future of hope and dedication -- and one that is forever young. Thank you

by Jackie Tortora

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

LIBOR Arrests Start

Exclusive: Prosecutors, regulators close to making Libor arrests


The letter ''B'' of the signage on the Barclays headquarters in Canary Wharf is hoisted up the side of the building in London July 20, 2012. REUTERS/Simon Newman

(Reuters) - Prosecutors and European regulators are close to arresting individual traders and charging them with colluding to manipulate global benchmark interest rates, according to people familiar with a sweeping investigation into the rigging scandal.

Federal prosecutors in Washington, D.C., have recently contacted lawyers representing some of the suspects to notify them that criminal charges and arrests could be imminent, said two of those sources, who asked not to be identified because the investigation is ongoing.

Defense lawyers, some of whom represent suspects, said prosecutors have indicated they plan to begin making arrests and filing criminal charges in the next few weeks. In long-running financial investigations it is not uncommon for prosecutors to contact defense lawyers before filing charges to offer suspects a chance to cooperate or take a plea, these lawyers said.

The prospect of charges and arrests means prosecutors are getting a fuller picture of how traders at major banks allegedly sought to influence the London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor, and other global rates that underpin hundreds of trillions of dollars in assets. The criminal charges would come alongside efforts by regulators to five major banks, and could show that the alleged activity was not rampant at the lenders.

"The individual criminal charges have no impact on the regulatory moves against the banks," said a European source familiar with the matter. "But banks are hoping that at least regulators will see that the scandal was mainly due to individual misbehavior of a gang of traders."

In Europe, financial regulators are focusing on a ring of traders from several European banks who allegedly sought to rig benchmark interest rates such as Libor, said the European source familiar with the investigation in Europe.

The source, who did not want to be identified because the investigation is ongoing, said regulators are checking emails among a group of traders and believe they are close to piecing together a picture of how the suspects allegedly conspired to make money by manipulating rates. The rates are set daily based on an average of estimates supplied by a panel of banks.

"More than a handful of traders at different banks are involved," said the source familiar with the investigation by European regulators.

There are also probes in Europe concerning Euribor, the Euro Interbank Offered Rate.

It is not clear on which individuals and banks federal prosecutors are most focused. A top U.S. Department of Justice lawyer overseeing the investigation did not respond to a request for comment.

Reuters previously reported that more than a dozen current and former employees of several large banks are under investigation, including Barclays Plc, UBS and Citigroup, and have hired defense lawyers over the past year as a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., continues to gather evidence.

Activity in the Libor investigation, which has been going on for three years, has quickened since Barclays agreed last month to pay $453 million in fines and penalties to settle allegations with regulators and prosecutors that some of its employees tried to manipulate key interest rates from 2005 through 2009.

Barclays, which signed a non-prosecution agreement with U.S. prosecutors, is the first major bank to reach a settlement in the investigation, which also is looking at the activities of employees at HSBC, Deutsche Bank and other major lenders.

HSBC declined to comment. Officials at Citigroup and UBS were not available for comment.

The Barclays settlement sparked outrage and a series of public hearings in Britain, after which Barclays Chief Executive Bob Diamond announced his resignation from the UK bank.

The revelations have raised questions about the integrity of Libor, which is used as a benchmark in setting prices for loans, mortgages and derivative contracts.

Adding to concerns are documents released by the New York Federal Reserve Bank this month that show regulators in the United States and England had some knowledge that bankers were submitting misleading Libor bids during the 2008 financial crisis to make their financial institutions appear stronger than they really were.

Among other details, the Fed documents included the transcript of an April 2008 telephone call between a Barclays trader in New York and Fed official Fabiola Ravazzolo, in which the unidentified trader said: "So, we know that we're not posting um, an honest Libor."

The source familiar with the investigation in Europe said two traders suspended from Deutsche Bank were among those being investigated. A Deutsche Bank spokesman declined to comment.

The Financial Times said on Wednesday that regulators were looking at suspected communication among four traders who had worked at Barclays, Credit Agricole, HSBC and Deutsche Bank.

Credit Agricole said it had not been accused of any wrongdoing related to the attempted manipulation of Libor by Barclays, but had responded to requests for information from various authorities related to the matter.

Beyond regulatory penalties and criminal charges, banks face a growing number of civil lawsuits from cities, companies and financial institutions claiming they were harmed by rate manipulation. Morgan Stanley recently estimated that the 11 global banks linked to the Libor scandal may face $14 billion in regulatory and legal settlement costs through 2014.

In the United States, the regulatory investigation is being led by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which has made the Libor probe one of its top priorities.

(Reporting by Matthew Goldstein and Jennifer Ablan in New York and Philipp Halstrick in Frankfurt, with additional reporting by Emily Flitter in New York and Aruna Viswanatha in Washington, D.C.; Editing by Alwyn Scott, Maureen Bavdek and Dale Hudson)

Related News


 

French Corp Control of Phones Failing

The Privatization From Hell
On 11 September 2009, A France Telecom employee threw herself out of the office window to her death. Hers was the 23rd suicide in the company since early 2008. There was another France Telecom suicide only several days previously. There were suicides before 2008; more were to come. The office window suicide marked a turning point.
On 14 September 2009, a senior manager was saved from an overdose of barbiturates, taken when she learnt that she was to be posted across the country for the third time in a year. On 28 September, another employee threw himself off a bridge, having recently been moved into a call centre in the Haute-Savoie from a backroom job across the other side of the country. That was the last straw.
On 4 July 2012, sometime France Telecom CEO/Chairman Didier Lombard was indicted for overseeing a campaign and culture of moral harassment of employees, allegedly driving over 30 staff under his watch to suicide. Lombard’s Deputy and his Human Relations Manager are also in the dock.
This is an instructive story for American watchers of corporate ‘personhood’. FT itself has been charged but FT has been unable to appear in person. Ironic that the French for legal entity is ‘personne morale’. The then CEO has been indicted as the proximate embodiment of the corporate person, the latter having displayed a decided lack of personal morality.
In late 2009, SUD, one of FT’s more radical unions, initiated action against the company. In February 2010, a report by the French Labor Inspectorate (complementing a private report) claimed that FT was culpable, and judicial proceedings were commenced in April. Lombard was forced to step down as CEO in March 2010, but stayed on as Chairman, from which position he was also forced out in January 2011. The mid-2012 indictment is part of a long process spurred by the defenestration of Suicide #23.
The saga begins in 1990. The EU issued the Telecom Services Directive and the Open Network Provision Directive which dictated full liberalization of telecommunication services and a framework for access to national public networks. France’s deadline for complying with these directives was 1 January 1998. Formally, the EU directives did not compel privatization, but privatization was in the ether, neoliberalist imperatives then rampaging across the continent.
Privatization was also on the cards in France. There was much on offer after President Mitterand’s wholesale nationalizations of 1981-83.   Denationalizations began under the ‘cohabitation’ Chirac government (1986-88), but were stalled with the Socialists returning to office in 1988. Nevertheless, the Ricard government (1988-91) was in liberalizing mode. Thus in 1990 the PTT (Postes, télégraphes et telephones) was taken out of the Ministry, and split into two companies (operative 1991) – France Télécom and La Poste. (Phone and Mail - ed)
The Right was returned to office in early 1993 in a landslide. One of Prime Minister Édouard Balladur’s first actions was to initiate the privatization of France Télécom. FT remained heavily unionized, and the multiple unions were appalled at the prospect.

Strikes ensue, impasse, the years pass. Alain Juppé is appointed Prime Minister in mid-1995; the Right gains the Presidency with Chirac’s election. Balladur’s initiatives are belatedly voted on in mid-1996, opening the way for partial privatization in 1997, with the state retaining majority ownership. The government gained leverage by doing a deal with a minority union (FO). Universal service would be guaranteed, and employees with public service status (fonctionnaires) would retain that status, but new hirees would be on private contract. It would be the largest privatization in French history. The two biggest unions (CGT, SUD) remained bitterly opposed. Employees themselves were targeted for share subscriptions (with concessions) to gain support for the privatization.
The Parti Socialiste in Opposition promised a halt to privatization. But the Socialists return to office in June 1997, under Lionel Jospin; a month later, it turns full circle. Jospin’s Economy/Finance Minister, a certain Dominique Strauss-Kahn, expedites the process, with the first tranche of 20% listed in October. With three tranches listed, the state’s ownership settles at 55%.
The Socialists were in a quandary – committed neither to public ownership nor privatization; reduced to pragmatism, naive on the implications of competition in telecommunications and myopic on the pain associated with the transition. The European Commission’s New Year deadline for deregulatory compliance loomed large. But all in politics were dazzled by the billions that would flow into the state’s coffers and optimistic on FT’s potential as a national champion in the global economy, seemingly buoyed by the dot.com boom. The politicians talked of ‘manna from heaven’. Indeed it was, but it was a Faustian bargain, and the souls of others were offered to the devil.
Michel Bon is appointed CEO of FT by Juppé (a friend) in late 1995 to prepare the institution for privatization. Bon had previously had an exemplary career in public service and the private sector, including banking; his immediate past appointment involved the rebuilding of the retail behemoth Carrefour. As well as passing through the elite École nationale d’administration, Bon had business degrees, including from Stanford (the recruiters at Carrefour hoped that Stanford had ‘distintoxicated’ him from his French training). Bon was the first person to be appointed head from a non-technical background (‘I am not an engineer, and there are many things that still remain a mystery to me’).
Bon joined mobile and the internet to FT’s fixed line inheritance. But, in a hurry, Bon spent lavishly on acquisitions. Bon was desperate to capture the substantial business of big business. Good companies had been bought (Orange), but also dogs (German MobilCom). FT had also gobbled up overseas telcos being privatized under pressure from the IMF.
FT went into the red in 2001; by mid-2002, it had debts of almost €70 billion. The dot.com bubble had burst in March 2000. The budding success story was now an enormous liability. The bulk of FT’s employees (part of 1.5 million small ‘investors’), having been seduced into transcending their traditional financial conservatism, were not amused at the plunging stock price.
The Socialists lose office to the Right in May 2002, and no longer had to wrestle with their conscience. Bon was replaced in October by one Thierry Breton. With both the requisite technical and managerial background, Breton had come from running, successively, Bull and Thomson Multimedia, with claims of having been decisive in ‘turning them around’.
Breton did generalize FT’s ADSL network across France, but his dominant brief was to attack the crushing debt burden. The new Raffarin government had no ideological hang-ups. December 2003 legislation abolishes FT’s monopoly on universal service provision, and opens the door to the ending of the state’s majority ownership. The government had pumped another €9 billion into FT in March 2003; now it wanted it back. More, the government wanted the FT selloff as successful precedent to privatize more public assets. The selloff begins in September 2004, with the state’s shareholding eventually reduced to the current stake of 27%. The state now hires the Chairman/CEO but is otherwise passive. Budgetary concerns were now pre-eminent; the country’s telecommunications needs would be determined by private entities.

Intensification of work and mass layoffs were a complementary priority. French weekly Marianne (19 October 2009) claimed that Breton was the man for the job. Mentored by Jean-Marie Descarpentries, ex-McKinsey ‘change management’ guru, at Bull, Breton “applied the methods of the master, with added testosterone, management by fear at best, by terror at worst, perennial plans with unattainable targets …”. Breton introduced ‘Ambition FT 2005’, to be driven by TOP (Total Operational Performance), including “€15 billion of ‘cost killing’, of which €6 billion to come from supply savings organised by 2IC Louis-Pierre Wenes; … [and] abolition of 22,000 jobs in 3 years”. Breton himself has claimed that, during his tenure, staff numbers were reduced by (only) 16,800, “in the very great majority of cases” due to retirement or voluntary departures. Some ex-employee commentators have begged to disagree on the ‘voluntary’ claim.
Wenes himself had been hired from management consultancy firm A T Kearney, ‘cost killing’ specialists. When Wenes was forced to step down in October 2009, a web article commenter claimed: “I know this man well, having rubbed shoulders with him … He doesn’t know what it is to be human. He has a head only for figures and has not hesitated to sack hundreds at a time, and even to close down the company.” At FT, Wenes continued to sub-contract Kearney, well remunerated, as consultants on cost savings.
With the selloff due to proceed in September 2004, a union official noted: “For the workers, the situation is already difficult: worsened working conditions, stress, sickness, despair, even suicides, because of the massive elimination of jobs, the incessant restructurings, the forced mobility. Total privatization will only aggravate this situation.”
Breton was called to the Finance Ministry in February 2005 to address not FT’s debts but the state’s. A Breton lieutenant, Didier Lombard, was promoted to the top job. Again, Lombard’s formal qualifications were impeccable, with classic technical training and experience. But the debt, albeit reduced, remained. Lombard embarks on a further strategic plan for 2006-08, titled NExT (New Experience in Telecom Services!). Upfront, the object is a new platform to sell customers bundled services (‘convergence’). But the complementary ambition (the ‘Crash’ programme) involves a further round of dramatic labour cost savings, especially with respect to the unsackable fonctionnaires. Thus more mass retrenchments and an escalation of harassment of those remaining. A (costly) network of 4000 cadres was built up to expedite the process.

An anonymous FT worker, 30 year veteran, noted (interview, 20 Minutes, free commuter daily, 14 September 2009): “For 5 years, it has become harder and harder. There are many job relocations or closure of services. When that happens, it is very difficult, for one has to re-learn everything. In 8 years, I have moved 4 times and changed my craft 3 times. It is easy to do this when one is 25 or 30. But it is another thing at 50 …”. The British Observer noted (20 September 2009) that a report to the Conseil d’Orientation pour l’Emploi “showed that in 2005 a quarter of French people had previously worked outside the region where they now work, against an EU average of 15%.” So much for the Anglo catechism that the French are stuck in their ways.

Thus to the suicides. On 14 July 2009, a Marseille-based engineer killed himself. The much-admired engineer’s talents and achievements were integral to FT’s technological transformation. Increasingly, he found his work rendered dysfunctional by incessant restructuring (in particular, the incorporation of Orange into the parent company under Lombard’s NExT program), and by a new breed of technically ignorant managers. His suicide note included (Mediapart, 6 October 2009): “I have killed myself because of my work at France Telecom. It is the sole cause. Endless ‘emergencies’, overwork, absence of training, total disorganization of the enterprise. Management by terror. … I’ve become a wreck. It is best that I end it.”

On 15 October 2009, an engineer employed at Lannion in Brittany hung himself. The site, a crucial FT research hub, had been a special target in 2008, with almost 100 positions earmarked for elimination. The same year, FT opened a research centre in Jordan.
Market analysts, social analysts, Anglo commentators particularly, FT spokespeople say – Stiff Cheddar. The suicide rate at FT is little different to that of the French population as a whole. The French, buffeted by the nanny state, can’t take insecurity. The changes were essential to improve efficiency and keep FT competitive. Etc.
The summer of 2006 had seen a systems breakdown debacle, for neglect of investment in infrastructure. Financial imperatives were competing with products/services maintenance and development. Rampant destabilization, driven by a management consultancy ethos, appeared to involve a sadistic element towards the fonctionnaires – their contribution ill-understood and their inherited status disdained. Thus the engineers and technicians themselves were to be attacked, and this supposedly to facilitate enhanced efficiency. Madness.
Lombard defended his record in Le Monde, 4 July. The situation was diabolical, said Lombard. Here was a company that he had devoted most of his professional life to. Survival required radical measures. No other sector had undergone such a profound transformation. There was FT’s massive debt, the demands of the European and French competition authorities, the sequential revolutions in technologies, etc. All true. But how quintessentially Marxist! Here is a chief executive claiming that ‘it’s the system that made me do it; I had no choice’. The representative bourgeois as impersonal bearer of capitalist social relations.

Lombard also claimed that the plans were oriented to minimizing the harm to the workforce and facilitating their transition into to the new digital age. The evidence indicates otherwise. The Labor Inspectorate report detailed evidence of a conscious strategy at the top to create an environment that forced employees to the edge. Perennial concerns expressed to top management by doctors, counsellors and inspectors were ignored. This behaviour constituted, prima facie, a crime under statutes passed in 2002.
So who is to blame? Certainly, Lombard and his two immediate underlings directed latter day proceedings. But they should be joined by the panoply of collaborators – the contemporary leaders of both sides of French politics; Bon and Breton; the ill-tutored eurobureaucrats and their French counterparts whose textbook competition mantra is oblivious to the specifics of telecommunications infrastructure and provision of essentially public goods; and so on.
The process of employee degradation was already in train with FT becoming a public company in the 1990s. Thus a manager who finally resigned in despair in 2000, having been brutalised continuously since declining to switch from fonctionnaire to private contract status in 1993, achieved a judgment in late 2011 (after 12 years of litigation) against FT for moral harassment (Mediapart, 26 February 2012). This judgement provides a precedent, but the Lombard indictment for a generalized culture of harassment is unpredecented.
Meanwhile, Bon’s career has continued unimpeded. Breton is feted as a giant with endless distinctions, including the Légion d’Honneur; most recently, the Les Echos 2011 Prix du Stratège. Lombard is also Légion d’Honneur, courtesy of Breton’s sponsorship. In 2008 (Wikipedia), he received the Prix de l’Innovation dans le Management de l’Innovation, and the Grand prix: manager BFM.
At worst, Lombard will be found guilty, given a minor suspended sentence, and a trivial fine, which he will pay as small change from the golden parachute he received from FT upon his less than illustrious resignation.
It’s called trickle down. Those at the bottom get to pay for all the mistakes made by those at the top, while those who made the mistakes sail on into nirvana.

For calendar year 2009, at the crest of the suicides, FT’s dividends payout exceeded its net profits. The dividend per share has been on the rise since 2002, since 2008 paid at €1.40 per share. Management’s decision to retain this rate for 2011 ignored dissent from employee shareholder representatives, but it received full support from the Finance Ministry. The dividend yield on FT shares is at least 12.6% (estimates differ), significantly above the industry average. The 2011 total payout was again higher than net profits of €3.9 billion, this in spite of a new competitor entering the domestic market, and 4thgeneration mobile investment looming. A union official quipped: “Of what use is a Ministry of Productivity Growth if [the state as shareholder] treats France Telecom as a milch cow?”. FT’s mobile network crashed in early July, leaving 26 million customers without connections. FT blamed another party, the supplier Alcatel-Lucent.
With aggressive purchases of foreign national telecoms, FT now has a global reach, with half of its employees based overseas. France Telecom has become a ‘national champion’. In effect, the suicides were casualties of global war by commercial means. Monuments should be erected to the fallen, especially outside FT head office, with the conventional inscription – Morts pour la France.
Yet, hot off the press (Le Canard Enchainé, 11 July), we learn that FT has run into a spot of bother in Equatorial Guinea, where it has run the telco network since 1984. A local FT operative, one Yves Garcia, witnesses some unsavoury corruption and becomes a whistleblower, but falls foul of the regime. Framed by a corrupt judge, Garcia escapes to France, only to find himself sidelined and harassed within FT, driven to depression, his computer appropriated and key files destroyed. FT moved to destroy its own principled staff member to keep the network contract, which the regime ended up giving to the Chinese anyway.
National champion indeed. It appears that the dead at France Telecom died for nothing other than the fat dividend cheques to the rentier state and Breton’s and Lombard’s Légion d’Honneur.

by Evan Jones, a retired political economist at Sydney University.
He can be reached at evan.jones@sydney.edu.au

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/23/the-privatization-from-hell/

Friday, July 20, 2012

NY AFL-CIO Supports UWUA

Labor Movement Unites with Locked-Out UWUA Local 1-2 Workers


New York City union members and working families rally behind the utility workers in the Con Ed lockout. A diverse group of thousands of union members and community supporters marched in the heat from Con Edison’s "ivory tower" at 4 Irving Place to Union Square, New York City. With chants of “We Are One!” and signs bearing such slogans as “Con Ed Can’t Con Me” and “Con Ed Took Away My American Dream,” people were expressing their frustrations and showing solidarity with the locked-out Utility Workers (UWUA).

As Harry Farrell, president of UWUA Local 1-2 told the crowd, “Today we are All utility workers!” Seeing the energy and size of the crowd in sweltering heat, it is hard to imagine that Con Edison understood the backlash when it locked out the workers and gave unreasonable contract demands. Representing 2.5 million workers and their families in the state, New York State AFL-CIO President Mario Cilento said:
Your fight is Our fight! We are all in this together.
The list of Union leaders pledging their support spanned all sectors, from public, private and building trades. Vincent Alvarez, president of the New York City Central Labor Council, said:
Each and every member of labor stands with you today!
To sign a petition in support of the workers, please click here; and check out our website, www.nysaflcio.org, for the latest details.
Visit www.ConEdRipoff.com and sign up for text messages from Local 1-2.

To see more pictures of the rally, click here.
On July 1, during a massive heat wave, Con Edison and its CEO Kevin Burke locked out 8,500 utility workers from Local 1-2. On July 3, Con Edison cut off health care benefits for all workers and their families. It reinstated the benefits on July 15 because of public pressure.
Since then, managers who are doing the dangerous work of the locked-out workers have been seriously injured, and citizens of New York City and Westchester have faced numerous power outages and service disruptions. Despite an investigation by the Public Service Commission and building public pressure, Con Edison so far continues to make unacceptable demands.